It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Fox News judge gives Trump terrible news amid Mueller speech

page: 6
21
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 29 2019 @ 10:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Duderino

originally posted by: sine.nomine

originally posted by: Duderino

originally posted by: PurpleFox
a reply to: Willtell

Muller didn’t say anything that wasn’t already in the report. Clown world.

Mueller just reinforced the truth and brought us back to what his report really meant.

That there's no evidence of any crimes, yet there's no evidence of not crimes?

Volume 2 describes the obstruction of justice. Not obstruction into some unnamed obscure crime, but obstruction of the ongoing investigation itself.
That is a crime. But you knew all this, didn't you?


Besides Mueller himself, Who Obstructed Justice??

The Mueller report stated that President Trump, nor anyone in the Administration, attempted to Obstruct his investigation.

In fact, it was just the opposite. Full cooperation was given.




posted on May, 29 2019 @ 10:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: Duderino

originally posted by: sine.nomine

originally posted by: Duderino

originally posted by: PurpleFox
a reply to: Willtell

Muller didn’t say anything that wasn’t already in the report. Clown world.

Mueller just reinforced the truth and brought us back to what his report really meant.

That there's no evidence of any crimes, yet there's no evidence of not crimes?

Volume 2 describes the obstruction of justice. Not obstruction into some unnamed obscure crime, but obstruction of the ongoing investigation itself.
That is a crime. But you knew all this, didn't you?


Besides Mueller himself, Who Obstructed Justice??

The Mueller report stated that President Trump, nor anyone in the Administration, attempted to Obstruct his investigation.

In fact, it was just the opposite. Full cooperation was given.


Clown world honk honk



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 11:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krakatoa

originally posted by: Willtell
...
Mueller says basically:

If we had evidence Trump didn’t commit a crime we would have said so

In other words, Trump committed a crime and we couldn’t indict him by law.


Last I checked, an investigation is supposed to prove guilt not, non-guilt. In other words, the default is innocent until PROVEN guilty. What is with the left that they honestly believe in people needing to be proven innocent?

The law requires you to be proven guilty.....


WTF???





An investigation does not prove guilt or innocence, they present their findings. It is then up to a prosecutor to determine if there is enough evidence for a trial. Within the US court system the defendant is presumed innocent until enough evidence is provided to ascertain, beyond a reasonable doubt, that a guilty verdict is rendered.

Squawking about "innocent until proven guilty" outside a court is a red herring. Like stating that you have freedom of speech which only means the government cannot prevent you from speaking, not that you can say anything anywhere without consequence.
edit on 29-5-2019 by Beaux because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 29 2019 @ 11:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Duderino

originally posted by: PurpleFox
a reply to: Willtell

Muller didn’t say anything that wasn’t already in the report. Clown world.


Exactly right... he said nothing new. And at the same time he completely contradicted Bill Barr's statements about the report.

Therefore, Barr lied.



I realize this is what you were told to think and therefore will insist this is the case until told otherwise by your masters, but it's not true:

Joint statement from DOJ and Special Counsel's Office


But a joint statement by Justice Department spokeswoman Kerri Kupec and Peter Carr, a spokesman for Mr. Mueller, disputed that the special counsel contradicted Mr. Barr.

“The Attorney General has previously stated that the Special Counsel repeatedly affirmed that he was not saying that, but for the OLC opinion, he would have found the President obstructed justice. The Special Counsel’s report and his statement today made clear that the office concluded it would not reach a determination – one way or the other – about whether the President committed a crime,” they said.

“There is no conflict between these statements,” the statement continued.


Another talking point busted. You guys are batting 0.000. Wasn't Trump supposed to be impeached in his first 90 days?
Keep listening to the same people who lie to you over and over. Ya'll never learn.
edit on 29 5 19 by face23785 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 12:15 AM
link   
- Trump won in 2016
- Trump won the SCOTUS
- Trump beat Mueller
- Impeachment is an emotional reaction to getting beat...Trump wins in Senate
- Impeachment won’t last 90 days
- Trump will be on 2020 ticket
- Trump will face Biden or Dem Socialist
- Judge Nap to be replaced by Dershowitz as top legal mind at FOX
- Next up...2024



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 02:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Willtell
judge napolitano is a gay man (which is fine!) he turned on POTUS when he was not gifted a seat on the Supreme Court.

Move on.. you weren't Qualified Judge!



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 02:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: Willtell

In other words, Trump committed a crime and we couldn’t indict him by law.




Just to be clear, if you were facing criminal or civil charges, you would be okay with that statement from an investigator or prosecutor? That because they couldn't conclude a crime occurred but we can't legally charge you?

That flies in the face that each of us is innocent until not only the State brings charges against us, but a jury of our peers deems otherwise.



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 02:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: LDragonFire
Trump had another bad day today, because he is a criminal. No one is above the law, Trump is going to find this out first hand.


What criminal activities is he charged with?



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 05:11 AM
link   
These liberal Democrats just wont give up.

The world is laughing at them, they look ridiculous. it's been almost 3 years, people are leaving their party in droves.

Yet they still keep going. Retards



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 05:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: LDragonFire
Trump had another bad day today, because he is a criminal. No one is above the law, Trump is going to find this out first hand.


will this happen before, or after Hillary's arrest?

Asking for a friend.



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 07:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Willtell

I can’t say with any confidence that you haven’t been murdering people and burying them in your basement.



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 08:21 AM
link   
Napolitano wanted a judicial posting, perhaps even the Supreme Court, and asked Trump in the Oval Office for such but was denied. He’s hated him ever since. Of course he’s going to say all kinds of crazy mess about Trump now. He’s just a vindictive little old man like all the rest in DC.



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 10:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Willtell

So Trump Obstructed Justice for a non crime?



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 10:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Willtell

Mueller says basically:

If we had evidence Trump didn’t commit a crime we would have said so

In other words, Trump committed a crime and we couldn’t indict him by law.




I forgot that the American justice system was founded on the presumption of guilt until proven innocent.

There has to be evidence that a crime was committed. You cannot prove a negative. There is absolutely nothing in the constitution that prevented Mueller from saying, “We discovered evidence that the president committed acts that intentionally obstructed this investigation, and recommend action taken by the office of the attorney general, pending review.”

This did not happen. He recommended the attorney general look into instances that MAY have amounted to obstruction.

This whole dog and pony show reeks of desperation.



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 10:45 AM
link   
I remember when some of you in this thread were adamant that Trump was a shill for Hillary. The hate is thick as thieves in here.

Almost 4 years after their real investigation started and STILL not one thing to indict Trump.

Mueller was simply covering his ass with that statement so he does not accidentally drown in the coming months.



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 10:45 AM
link   
I would go soft on 'Herr' Mueller....He's probably in it since the start, keeping the fire burning so as to keep TDS high among libtards, imagine when the impeachment process grinds to a halt because there is no evidence!



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 11:11 AM
link   
a reply to: WhyDidIJoin

Yes; he's a politician he had a vested interest in impeding the investigation even if he knew it could not find guilt ... because it could still hurt him politically.

I'm not saying he did; just that there is a motivation for him obstructing even if he knew he was innocent.

One could make the argument "he was just defending his innocence" ... that could be true. However there is a right and wrong way to do that. It is possible that he obstructed justice while trying to defend his innocence.

This line of argument however is frought with problems though. While it is true that he could have obstructed justice while defending himself politically and/or while he was defending his innocence ... it does call into question whether or not he was set up for obstruction charges. For example when did the multiple investigations know he was innocent of the crime they where investigating? The longer they knew he was innocent and still continued the investigation the higher the likelihood that they were trying to entrap him in obstruction. In simpler terms; did the multiple investigations knowingly push him closer to obstruction by systimaticaly and unnecessarily hurting him politically? Did they increasingly force him to defend him self while knowing he was innocent?

If we where talking about a normal detective investigating a low level crime/defendant I think most people would admit the actions of the investigation teams, in the face of an innocent defendant, are suspect. We complain about LOE overreach like this all the time. We as a society are grappling with the heavy handed tactics of our justice system. It isn't hard to believe these systemic problems go all the way to the top.

The problem for Trump is that he is reactionary and volatile in his decision making. These traits help him some times, he would not be president if he did not have these traits. But they also make him vulnerable to trolling from the investigation teams.



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 11:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: Woodcarver
a reply to: Willtell

I can’t say with any confidence that you haven’t been murdering people and burying them in your basement.


Some unnamed sources familiar with the matter told me this was a picture of Will caught in the act-


Good enough for me!



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 12:03 PM
link   
a reply to: LDragonFire

First off if you can not see the trees in front of you stay out the forest.
The law says you can not arrest a sitting president for crimes he committed before taking office .
Only way to get him for a crime is if he commits one against Congress and they impeach him for it.
Mueller is a lap dog to the organized people trying to overthrow the potus he always has been.
The reason comey leaked to press illegally and never charged for it was to get rodenstein to call for a special prosecutor.
Comey asked for Mueller his good friend to be named to that job.

Their can not be obstruction of justice here because their was found to be no collusion .

You must have a crime to obstruct to actually be guilty of obstruction of said crime.

All of us have the right to bitch and moan when we are being railroaded for crimes we did not commit its called free speech.

All of us have the right to vigorously defend ourselves when we being attacked

Prosecutors do not have the right to harass your legal team to get info that is protected by attorney client privelege. In actual court of law that would likely be thrown out and prosecutor reprimanded by judge if it did not cause a mistrial.



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 12:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: underpass61

originally posted by: Woodcarver
a reply to: Willtell

I can’t say with any confidence that you haven’t been murdering people and burying them in your basement.


Some unnamed sources familiar with the matter told me this was a picture of Will caught in the act-


Good enough for me!
#ing clowns




top topics



 
21
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join